PDF Version (Day)

PDF Version (Night)

June 8, 2015

HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY PROCEEDINGS

Vol. XLVII No. 27

The House met at 1:30 p.m.

MR. SPEAKER (Verge):

Order, please!

Admit strangers.

I am pleased to welcome to the public gallery this

afternoon several members of the Newfoundland and Labrador Foster Families

Association, along with the Executive Director, Diane Molloy.

Welcome to the House of Assembly.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

Statements by Members

MR. SPEAKER:

Today we will hear members' statements from members representing the

Districts of Conception Bay South, Port au Port, Bay of Islands, Carbonear

Harbour Grace, Mount Pearl South, and Bonavista South.

The hon. the Member for Conception Bay South.

MR. HILLIER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Every day in Newfoundland and Labrador, two young

workers aged fifteen to twenty-four are injured on the job; the Workplace

Health, Safety and Compensation Commission's goal is to empower workers,

especially youth, to take action and to help foster a culture of safety

throughout our Province. The

Commission firmly believes that fostering a strong safety culture among

young workers builds a foundation that will lead to less workplace injuries.

Today I would like to congratulate Holy Spirit High

School from the District of Conception Bay South and the school's

Occupational Health and Safety team on recently winning the seventh season

of Who Wants to Save a Life?, a gameshow sponsored by WHSCC.

The team became Provincial Health and Safety Champions by defeating a

strong team from Indian River High School in Springdale.

Members of the winning team are Oliver Barnes, Tanisha

Fleming, Chelsea Hounsell, Megan Coles, Mark Hemmings, and teacher sponsor

Mr. Tony Pretty. Each member of

the winning team received $1,000 scholarship and the school received a prize

of $5,000.

I ask all members to join with me in congratulating

Holy Spirit High School and WHSCC in helping prevent workplace injuries

among our youth.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Port au Port.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CORNECT:

I rise today to recognize and congratulate all of the Level III students in

the District of Port au Port.

During the past number of weeks the graduating students of Stephenville

High, Piccadilly Central High, and cole Sainte-Anne have had the

opportunity to celebrate the many years of memories and experiences that

moulded their lives. This is an

important milestone one that will lead them to new and exciting

experiences as they prepare to either enter the workforce or continue on to

post-secondary studies.

Mr. Speaker, these schools have prepared the students

well for a world of opportunities.

They have worked arduously to reach this goal, and realize that no

matter what career path they choose, their training and education will play

a very important role.

I would like to commend the school principals, staff,

parents, guardians and graduates who deserve the highest accolades on the

success of your accomplishment.

Je demande tous les honorables membres de se joindre

moi pour fliciter tous les diplms rcents et leur souhaiter nos

meilleurs vux alors qu'ils prparent leur avenir.

I ask all hon. members to join me in congratulating our

latest graduates and wish them well as they prepare for their future

endeavours.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bay of Islands.

MR. JOYCE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the Level III

graduating class of St. James All Grade School in Lark Harbour.

On May 22, I had the pleasure of attending the

graduation ceremonies which began with a church service followed by a

dinner, presentation of scrolls and a dance later in the evening.

The evening was filled with tears, laughter and joy as

they spoke of the bonds of friendships formed from a young age and the

memories and experiences they shared together which they will now take with

them as they begin the next

chapter in their lives.

The students were very appreciative of the guidance and

support of their families, teachers and each other for helping shape their

lives and making them the individuals they are today.

The twelve graduates include: Leah Callfas, Cheyanne

Lushman, Monica Rotchford, Christian Payne, Dylan Larkin, Nicholas Skinner,

Kennedy Sheppard, Courtney Pennell, Zachary Sheppard, Jonah Sheppard, Tyson

Hoskins, and Nathan Sheppard.

This is a gifted group of young adults and I am confident our Province is in

safe hands.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all members to join me in

congratulating the 2015 graduating class of St. James All Grade and wish

them every success in the future.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize Alice Blundon for

her outstanding commitment for over twenty years as the founder and

volunteer leader of the St. Paul's Fun and Fitness program in Harbour Grace.

Alice has an outstanding history of volunteerism

serving over twenty-five years with the CBN Figure Skating Club and heavily

involved in the Carbonear Recreation Commission.

She was a director of the 1992 Summer Games and a volunteer with the

2012 Summer Games.

As the leader of the Fun and Fitness program, Alice

leads by example; her physical strength is matched by the strength of her

character. The main focus of the

class is the performance of a comprehensive routine of exercises to help

improve strength, flexibility, endurance, bone density, et cetera.

Alice's Fun and Fitness class also provides a

supportive social environment.

Besides being a wonderful health care provider, she is an outstanding

teacher who demonstrates infinite patience and camaraderie.

Mr. Speaker, I ask all hon. members to join me in

congratulating Alice Blundon on receiving her outstanding achievement award

for everything she has done for more than twenty years in physical fitness

and overall wellness in the Town of Harbour Grace.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Mr. Speaker, it is my privilege to stand in this hon. House to speak about a

great event which will be taking place in my district this coming Sunday

evening. Celebrity Karaoke is

being hosted by the Kinsmen Club of Mount Pearl of which I am a proud member

and will be raising funds for three great charities: the K-Rock Children's

Trust, the MS Society, and Cystic Fibrosis.

A big thank you to some wonderful corporate partners:

Steele Communications, Tol's Time-Out Lounge, and Browning Harvey Limited,

as well as to the many community-minded businesses who have donated prizes

for ticket draws and the silent auction.

Also, a special thank you to all of the local celebrities who will be

taking

part in the entertainment, including a number of media personalities,

local entertainers, city councillors, community activists, as well as a

number of members of this hon. House.

Finally, a huge thank you to the members of the Kinsmen

Club of Mount Pearl for the significant role they play in my community.

Their efforts certainly do not go unnoticed and they are community

heroes, each and every one. I

encourage the general public and all members of this hon. House to head out

to Tol's Time-Out Lounge this coming Sunday, June 14, at 7:00 p.m. for what

promises to be an awesome time for some great charities.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Bonavista South.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. LITTLE:

Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, I rise today to pay tribute to the late

Captain Morrissey Johnson who was a Master Mariner from Catalina.

I had the privilege of knowing Captain Johnson over the

years. He was certainly a true

Newfoundlander and Labradorian who loved this Province and its people

dearly.

Captain Johnson's career as a sealing skipper spanned

over several decades. He was a

champion of the seal hunt who employed hundreds of people.

Captain Johnson's vessels were also a mainstay on the Coast of

Labrador for many years transporting salt fish to the mainland markets in

Quebec and overseas. Captain

Johnson and his boat, The Lady Johnson

II , were involved in seismic activity on Canada's East Coast.

Johnson's vessels were chartered by national and international oil

exploration companies.

In 1984, Morrissey Johnson was elected as the Member of

Parliament representing the riding of Bonavista-Trinity-Conception.

He was a remarkable man who always spoke highly of Newfoundland and

Labrador and our people. Captain

Morrissey was also a successful entrepreneur who operated a tour boat

business from St. John's harbour.

Mr. Speaker, hon. colleagues, please join me in

honouring Captain Morrissey Johnson.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Statements by Ministers.

Statements by Ministers

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to

recognize a number of this Province's environmental leaders.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. CRUMMELL:

The Newfoundland and Labrador Environmental Awards is an annual celebration

of environmental achievements in our Province that raises awareness of the

individuals, groups, and businesses that are taking action to protect and

sustain our environment. It is a

joint initiative sponsored by the Department of Environment and

Conservation, the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board, and the Newfoundland

and Labrador Women's Institutes.

Mr. Speaker, I had the pleasure last week of presenting

these awards to the following recipients: Bethany Downer of St. John's in

the Individual Category; Restoration of Labrador Exploration Sites Project

of St. John's in the Community Group or Organization Category; Macdonald

Drive Junior High in St. John's in the School Category; Brendan Kelly of

Paradise in the Youth Category; the Town of Carmanville Habitat Committee in

the Municipal Category; Newfoundland Power Inc. in the Business Category;

and Robert Schmiedendorf of Flatrock for the Lifetime Achievement Award.

Mr. Speaker, each of these winners received a $1,000

honorarium from the Multi-Materials Stewardship Board to go towards

furthering our own environmental projects, or to donate to an environmental

cause of their choice.

These individuals, groups, and businesses are truly

environmental ambassadors for our Province.

They have demonstrated tremendous ingenuity and determination, along

with an impressive passion for our environment.

It is important to recognize their great accomplishments and

encourage others to follow their example.

Mr. Speaker, a healthy and sustainable environment

yields healthy people, a stronger economy, more vibrant communities, and a

legacy for which we can be proud.

We will continue to raise awareness about sustaining our Province for

generations to come not only during Environment Week, but every week of the

year.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's South.

MR. OSBORNE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for an advance copy of the

statement as well. We, on this

side of the House as well, would like to commend and congratulate the

individuals, schools, community organizations, municipalities, and

businesses who won awards. As

well, Mr. Speaker, I think it is only fitting to recognize those who were

nominated but did not win awards.

All of these individuals, organizations, businesses,

and schools certainly contribute to helping sustain our environment and

adding to ideas and innovation that can help our environment and help to

lead to new ideas on how we make sure that the place we live in is a better

place when we pass it on to the next generation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his

statement here today.

Congratulations, Mr. Speaker, to all who have been recognized this year

organizations or individuals.

Congratulations, as well to all the unsung heroes who work every day to

ensure this beautiful Province is preserved for future generations.

We know the work they do.

To mark the day, World Oceans Day, I salute the

winners, I salute their environmental achievements, and I encourage each and

every person to

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. MURPHY:

reflect on what they can do to preserve our environment and make ours a

beautiful Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

MR. S. COLLINS:

Mr. Speaker, I rise in this hon. House today to recognize the annual

Newfoundland and Labrador Foster Families Association symposium which took

place in St. John's this past weekend.

The theme for this year's provincial symposium was

Fostering Well Being and brought

together foster parents, social workers, representatives of foster care

associations, and community partners from across the Province to participate

in workshops. It also provided

an opportunity for foster parents to network with their peers, share

experiences with one another, and celebrate being foster parents.

The Newfoundland and Labrador Foster Families

Association plays an extremely valuable role in our child protection system,

facilitating safe and supportive environments for children and youth in

care. Mr. Speaker, I want to

take this opportunity to thank the association for its dedication to this

vulnerable sector of our population, and all foster parents throughout the

Province for opening their hearts and homes to the many children and youth

in their time of need.

Nurturing, advocacy, teamwork, training, and support are all key to the

fostering experience and to the work which is undertaken each and every day

to support children and youth who are in care throughout our Province.

Mr. Speaker, I am also very pleased to acknowledge the

official launch of the Foster Care

Handbook which took place at the symposium.

It is important that foster families are recognized and supported for

the significant role they play in the lives of children and youth who have

been welcomed into their homes.

Developed through a partnership between the Foster Families Association and

the Department of Child, Youth and Family Services, the handbook is designed

to help foster families understand the policies and procedures that govern

the important task at hand namely the care and protection of youth

entrusted to their care.

Our Foster a

Future campaign has been very successful since its implementation, and

continues to create awareness surrounding the need for more foster parents.

To date, the campaign has resulted in the approval of 175 new

placements in 115 foster homes.

Our government will continue the campaign this year through an investment of

$150,000.

Mr. Speaker, I commend the Newfoundland and Labrador

Foster Families Association for their tremendous contributions to our

Province, and I look forward to a continued partnership built on the best

interests of children and youth in care.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Burgeo La Poile.

MR. A. PARSONS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I thank the minister for the advance copy of his

statement. I would also like to

thank the Member for St. Barbe who is the Opposition MHA responsible, but

let me speak to this very important statement today.

I had the pleasure as well of being at the symposium on Friday night.

I can only say what a profound effect that meeting had on me and

absolutely everybody in that room when you hear of the stories of foster

parents and foster children throughout the Province and the good work that

is being done by foster families across the Province.

There was a story told by a young man about his journey

going into foster care and the light at the end of the tunnel and the great

upbringing that he had because of foster parents.

There was not a dry eye in the room.

Again, I want to congratulate the Foster Families

Association for the great work they do.

I also want to commend government on their campaign Foster a Future.

It is a good campaign and it is working, and I hope we can see more

there because there is still a need for more homes for children in this

Province.

The one thing I would say to the minister,

unfortunately we had a great turnout but we could see more there.

If we could find a way to make it easier for foster families and

parents to come to St. John's to be a part of this meeting, because it is

important. It is basically their

professional development and a chance to sit and talk to parents all across

the Province.

Again, I commend the association for a great meeting

and I commend foster families all across this Province.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

I, too, thank the minister for the advance copy of his

statement. I am very pleased to

recognize the symposium the Foster Families Association holds every year,

and did once again this weekend.

It is such an important opportunity for doing face-to-face training, for

networking, and also for finding and giving support to foster families for

the challenging role they have taken on, and it is a challenging role.

Because of their important role, these families need the best

resources we can give them.

Certainly a handbook is a key resource, but there will

always be a need for various types of in person training as well as

continual support from social workers to ensure the very best outcomes for

the children.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Further statements?

Oral Questions.

Oral Questions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier said last week that oil prices are higher

now than they predicted in their Budget.

He said this could allow some flexibility, but on Budget Day oil was

trading at $67 a barrel, today it is $63.

I ask the Premier: With oil trading lower today than on

Budget Day, why are you now claiming that you have Budget flexibility?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When we approached our Budget this year we knew we had

very difficult, challenging decisions to make, Mr. Speaker.

There have been some very hard decisions to make, but we were willing

to do that. We made the

decisions that we felt we needed to make.

As well, we brought forward a five-year financial plan.

We have a five-year attrition plan.

We have a five-year plan for infrastructure as well, but also with

looking very early, is what I said.

Very early the oil prices had been higher against what had been

anticipated, yet we have a long period of time ahead of us before we can

make any changes or rash decisions, Mr. Speaker.

My comment is that I am encouraged by that, and if it

were to stay that way for the rest of this year then it will put us in a

position where we could revisit some of those very difficult decisions that

we made.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This government is quite used to and accustomed to

revisiting every plan they put out there, because every plan that we said

ends in failure.

The Premier says he will consider reversing his

regressive HST hike if oil rebounds but this regressive tax should not be

dependent on where oil prices are each day, each week, or each month.

This is not the way to manage government finances.

I ask the Premier: Your Budget was tabled just

thirty-nine days ago; based on your comments, have you already lost

confidence in that document?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

No, Mr. Speaker, not at all. I

have not lost confidence in the document.

What I said and I stand by is that we do not control

the world oil prices, Mr. Speaker.

We do not control them.

We rely on a number of factors, assistance and supports for us to make our

projections and to lay out our Budget, and we have done that, Mr. Speaker.

Over the last decade or so, most years we have done very, very well,

very closely, but in the last year the unprecedented drop in oil prices has

had a significant impact on many jurisdictions in Canada, and it is no

different here in Newfoundland and Labrador.

Talk about revisiting decisions, Mr. Speaker, because

the member opposite knows a lot about that.

We know time and time and time again he revisits decisions, changes

his mind, and changes his position, Mr. Speaker.

I will be glad to speak more about them when I get the next chance to

get up.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

We have not even seen this Budget voted on in this

House of Assembly and already this is a Premier who is looking at changing

the contents. I remind the

Premier, I would ask him if he is in touch with Ms Judy Manning lately.

The Premier is governing based on the price of oil,

which he acknowledges he has no control over.

Instead, the Premier should be focused on growing our economy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BALL:

With all economic indicators pointing in the wrong direction, this is not

the time for a regressive HST hike, but the Premier now says he can decide

this fall if he will impose the increase or not, clearly electioneering.

I ask the Premier: When exactly will the people of the

Province know if your planned HST hike will actually come into effect or

not?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I see I will have to take this in very small steps and

explain it to the member of the Opposition.

I would be quite willing to do that.

As I have said, if these trends continue throughout the year, Mr.

Speaker, then later in this year we will be able to review, if that is what

continues to happen. We

obviously cannot make decisions or changes on a very short period of time

and I have been very clear about that.

The member opposite accuses us of changing our

position. Mr. Speaker, just today we

announced the boundary change, a boundary change which he agreed with.

No, no, wait now, he did not agree with.

Oh no, he did agree with it because he continued to change.

He agreed that there could be an election in November.

As a matter of fact he said he was quite clear it would not matter to

him if we had to move the election to November so we could have an election

in 2015, he was fine with it. He

has changed his position on that again.

That is just a matter of topic that is being in discussion

(inaudible).

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

One thing that has clearly changed as a result of this

Premier is the fact we now are borrowing at levels never like before in the

history of this Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. BALL:

We are now at the highest deficit than ever.

That is what has changed in this Province since this Premier has come

into office. Government uses an

IQ score to determine whether or not to provide services to youth and adults

with autism.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. BALL:

There are no services offered to a youth or adult with autism who has an IQ

score of more than seventy, not even respite care.

Both the Autism Society as well as Families for Effective Autism

Treatment adamantly disagree with this outdated policy.

I ask the Premier: Why do you continue to enforce this

exclusionary IQ policy?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, one of the things we do over here I can tell you is that we

make great attempts to work very closely with stakeholder groups throughout

the Province that have an interest in a number of varieties of areas.

One of the things that we have done this year in our Budget, despite

the fact that we are facing very challenging times, is that we did not want

to have a significant hard, fast impact on large numbers of public servants.

We know that when you do that, the first thing that is impacted is

the delivery of programs and services.

Members opposite know about that because they did it

back in the early 1990s when 2,000 people were sent to the streets and there

were significant impacts

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

to programs and services in the Province.

We are certainly not going there.

While we have had difficult decisions to make, Mr.

Speaker, while we have had challenging decisions to make, we are continuing

with the programs and services.

We are going to continue to provide best value to the people of the

Province.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would think that the Premier, when I asked about the

families affected by autism in our Province he opened his comment by

clearly saying that he is listening to people.

He did not even address the question, I say, Mr. Speaker.

I ask the Premier again: If the Autism Society as well

as Families for Effective Autism Treatment disagree with this outdated

policy, why do you continue to enforce this exclusionary IQ policy?

I ask the Premier: Stand on your feet and answer the

question.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, one of the great things that happens when you work with

specialized interest groups, especially those that are very close to matters

very important such as autism, is that you learn of the evolution of new

policies, new ways to do business.

It is constant, it constantly happens, and we look at that all the

time, Mr. Speaker. We constantly

look at: Is there a better way to deliver programs and services?

Is there a better method of assessment?

Is there a better way so that people can benefit better from it?

We are all for that, Mr. Speaker.

There are no two ways about it.

Services and programs to autism, how they are

delivered, how they are assessed are all part of that, Mr. Speaker, and I

can tell you we are very open to look at better ways to provide those

services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Well, the Premier clearly articulates, he talks about

those words, those things of listening to people but when those people are

coming with solutions, the Premier is certainly dismissing the advice that

they are giving him. Government

uses this policy to deny services such as home support, residential options,

and behavioural intervention services.

Just imagine a fourteen-year-old who is exceptionally bright is

challenged by behavioural issues, not getting the support needed, and

therefore not being permitted to attend school.

I ask the Premier: Do you think it is appropriate that

you are denying this youth and their family any level of support simply

because they happen to have an IQ higher than seventy?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Acting Minister of Education and Early

Childhood Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. DALLEY:

The Leader of the Opposition referenced school-aged children, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. DALLEY:

I think we have had a lot of discussion about autism and the acknowledged

increase in autistic students in our school systems.

There are a variety of methods through the student support services,

educational planning, different accommodations for curriculum, as well as

student assistant supports, as well as itinerants for autism.

There are a variety of supports, but I certainly

acknowledge there are many challenges out there.

I would say to the member opposite if we have a student who is not in

school, there may be multiple reasons, but I will certainly gladly take the

name, try to work with the family, encourage the school district and the

schools to work with families, because it is about kids.

We do not want them home.

We want them in school. There

are a variety of supports available for autism, but we have to continue to

work together to make the best of those supports.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Leader of the Official Opposition.

MR. BALL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This outdated policy assumes that an IQ over seventy is

a predictor of a person's adaptable skills and how they can perform and

function within a community. We

know this is unfair, we know this is untrue.

Results of an IQ test do not reflect the severity which an individual

may be affected by autism.

I ask the Premier: Will you finally stop using this

antiquated policy, instead use an adaptable, functioning assessment?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Child, Youth and Family Services.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS:

Mr. Speaker, if I can echo the words from the Minister of Education, the

autism spectrum disorder is a very wide spectrum, and there are obviously

challenges inherent to that, but I am happy to say the department is

committed to reviewing best practices, and certainly that is one.

It was only a week or two ago that I met out at the

front steps with a group out there.

They had some issues with regard to the IQ and the testing for that.

I had very frank discussions with them.

We are always looking at ways to improve services, and certainly if

that is one we can do, that is something we are going to review and look at.

Again, we are always open to reviewing best practices,

and that is a big one for this government and certainly something I support

as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Mr. Speaker, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released its final

report this past week on Canada's long, sad, history with Aboriginal

children attending residential schools.

The report contained many recommendations that Prime Minister Harper

has not committed to implementing.

I ask the minister: What will he do to ensure the

federal government supports and implements the recommendations of the report

so Aboriginal victims in this Province receive fair and appropriate

compensation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission have been watched very

closely by many throughout Canada and the work they have done has resulted

in ninety-four calls to action.

It was very interesting that when you read the report

how it acknowledges, identifies the difference of Newfoundland and Labrador

versus the rest of the country.

Currently, members of the House are very much aware that there is still an

action before the courts. The

federal government has now taken steps to actually cause us to be included

in that action as well, Mr. Speaker, but we would look for a fair and equal

treatment to all people, not only of Newfoundland and Labrador but all

persons of Canada, and including our Aboriginal people from Labrador.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The Aboriginal victims of residential schools in this

Province were not included in Prime Minister Harper's apology and

compensation package in 2008.

They have been shunned by the Prime Minister and they want to make sure it

does not happen the second time.

So I guess I ask the Premier: What correspondence have

you had with Ottawa in support of Aboriginal victims of residential schools

in this Province?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that to ensure, as I mentioned, a fair treatment

to Aboriginals in this Province and ensure that they are treated fairly as

they are, and the same as all Canadians and all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians, as I said, is very important to us as well.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

I can tell you the minister has been engaged in this file.

He is working with counterparts and engaged with other stakeholder

groups, Mr. Speaker. We want to

make sure that we have fair and equal treatment of all Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians.

The matter here, Mr. Speaker just for a point of

clarification on this, is that the matters predate Confederation.

It is one of the legal discussions that is taking place through this

entire process, but it is puts us in a unique circumstance from those in the

rest of the country.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Torngat Mountains.

MR. EDMUNDS:

Mr. Speaker, the last residential schools closed in 1979.

The Premier said the TRC report contains ninety-four recommendations,

twenty-four of them require action from provincial governments across the

country.

I ask the Premier: What plan do you have in place to

address the recommendations in the Truth and Reconciliation report that

require action from this provincial government?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Mr. Speaker, we have been taking steps in reconciliation since the early

2000s, as a matter of fact since 2004.

In 2005, as a result of that, the Labrador Inuit Land Claims

Agreement was reached with us here in the Province.

As well, there were processes that led, a very

difficult process, to the New Dawn Agreement.

We have reached agreement there, Mr. Speaker, with our Innu partners

as well.

So we have already taken steps on reconciliation, Mr.

Speaker, and we will continue to that.

We are assessing the report and the recommendations, as the member

opposite has indicated. There

are ninety-four calls to action within the report, and many of them do have

impacts on provinces and territories.

We are continuing to review and assess all those recommendations.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

Mr. Speaker, since 2013, residents of Port au Port in the Bay St. George

area have been raising concerns about oil leaking from Port au Port from

abandoned oil drill sites on Shoal Point.

They had no answers from the federal government or the provincial

leaking into the bay.

I ask the minister: Who is responsible for cleanup of

these sites and what immediate actions will be taken?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, we are certainly aware of the situation.

Any time that we hear reports of oil out there, our officials get on

that right away, our department gets on it right away.

Even though we did not receive a complaint directly or

We heard about it on Thursday, June 4.

We took immediate action.

We sent an official out to the site to have a look.

We received a report on that over the weekend, Mr. Speaker.

We need more information.

We sent the official back to the site again today of where it was reported.

We are actually going out with the individual who reported that on

So we are on top of this.

We are looking into it.

We need to determine how this is happening, if it is a natural occurrence or

if it is coming from former oil drill sites.

Mr. Speaker

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville East.

MR. REID:

Mr. Speaker, residents of the area have been raising these concerns since

back in 2013. There have been

stories about this in the newspaper.

I want to ask the minister: How did this situation get

so bad, and what is he going to do right now to clean up that situation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Again, Mr. Speaker, just to clarify and get the facts on the table.

Oil seepage in that area has been documented since the early 1800s.

Shoal Point was the first report

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. CRUMMELL:

There was oil documented there in the area since 1874; J.P. Howley

documented it as well. The first

drilling occurred in 1898.

So we are finding out exactly where this oil is coming

from. That is exactly what we

are doing. We are doing the work

that needs to be done. We are

going to find out the extent of the problem, where the oil is coming from.

We will determine then exactly what the next steps are.

We are confident in our abilities to find out what is going on and to

address the issue, Mr. Speaker.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

A recent CBC story chronicles the struggles of Mr. Pat

Dunphy of Bay Bulls and his ongoing struggles with workers' compensation.

In particular, this recent story shows the totally inadequate

transportation being provided to Mr. Dunphy to attend required medical

appointments. The video footage

shows that the vehicle being used does not have the appropriate tie-downs

and leaves Mr. Dunphy bouncing around in his wheelchair, thus placing him at

significant risk to his fragile health.

I ask the minister: Besides simply making a phone call

and asking a service provider if they have accessible transportation, what

specific measures does the Workplace Health, Safety and Compensation

Commission take, such as inspections, to ensure that accessible

transportation provided to injured workers is safe?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Workplace Health, Safety and

Compensation Commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

While I cannot speak to individual cases I, too, saw

the story to which the member is referring to.

I cannot speak to individual cases; however, I can say that cases are

very complicated. Not only with

regard to the services that are provided, for example, with Metrobus and

public transportation, but also medical files and what has gone into a

person's injury and how that is accounted for.

So while I cannot get into specifics, I would be more

than happy to have a discussion around what is done.

I know again getting back to the geographical area where you live in,

if there are other opportunities to avail of public transportation that

would be something that is taken into account as well.

Again, I cannot really get down in the weeds, as I cannot discuss

individual cases.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I appreciate that, but I was not asking about a

specific case. I was asking

about what the government does to ensure that accessible transportation is

safe for people to use, so I ask the minister again.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Workplace Health, Safety and

Compensation Commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

First and foremost, I would say to the member, we look

to see if public transportation is accessible.

That would be the starting point, but again, that is just one piece

of it. Assessing the person's

injury and how that came about, that is another part of the work that the

Commission does as well. So it

is a multi-faceted approach.

There is not one simple answer, but like I say, one of the starting points

person's geographical area.

Again, I do not want to add commentary to the story, but I think that was

done in this case.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Mount Pearl South.

MR. LANE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It may have been considered accessible, but the

question is, was it adequate, and was the vehicle safe, and it should be

inspected.

Mr. Speaker, in addition to the transportation issue,

Mr. Dunphy has been fighting with workers' compensation for the past seven

years to get modifications made to his home in order to make it accessible

seven years, I say.

So I ask the minister: Don't you think that having an

unacceptable, and what do you, as minister, intend to do about it?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister Responsible for the Workplace Health, Safety, and

Compensation Commission.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. S. COLLINS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not aware of all the individual pieces of this

case. I do know if the member

across the way is he is talking as if he is, because, of course, as I said

before, cases are very complex.

To be able to stand in the House and speak to an individual case, obviously

there are huge challenges around workers' compensation commission and the

types of people we are dealing with, vulnerable people, and people who have

gone through rough bouts in their life, and that is why we want people

look at workplace health and safety as challenges.

I look at it as opportunity.

Places we can improve, and we have been doing that the last number of

years, and certainly we will want to create positive change in all aspects.

So again, I cannot speak to the specific case, but I

feel for the gentleman as well.

I want to make sure that all services that are able to be provided to him

certainly are. I think that is

the case, but I would be more than willing to take a look into it.

Thank you.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Stats Can labour force survey shows the Province is in

its nineteenth consecutive month of year-over-year job losses.

There are 2,300 fewer people working this May than last May.

Our unemployment rate is over twice the national average.

I ask the Premier: You try to blame this economic mess

you have created on falling oil prices, but this job-loss trend started in

November 2013; now what is your excuse?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, everyone recognizes as projects develop and scale down, there

are going to be some changes in the workforce within the Province.

A very interesting stat, the past three years have been the highest

terms of average annual employment since at least 1976.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Mr. Speaker, the indicators show that the Province has been very strong in

that regard. As we look forward

to other projects coming on stream, we look for the same results.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Virginia Waters.

MS C. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Government promised an era of prosperity, but there are

fewer people working today than when they were elected in 2011.

On March 10, the Premier said he would release a workforce

development action plan in the coming weeks.

That was three months ago.

I ask the Premier: Why aren't you treating this job

crisis with the urgency it deserves?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Let me continue with a few other stats.

Mr. Speaker, 2013 and 2014 showed the lowest unemployment rates in

this Province since stats have been recorded.

That speaks to it.

We have job vacancy reports that are out there, the

labour market information, all which help to inform individuals, businesses,

and companies on the way to move forward.

It is all about developing a positive work climate within the

Province, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Mr. Speaker, last week in the House we debated a PMR on the Northern cod

fishery, which our people fished for over 500 years until the 1992

moratorium. I was informed by

the former Fisheries Minister in a letter last June that a draft rebuilding

plan for Northern cod would be completed by the end of 2014.

I ask the current minister: Has this plan been drafted?

If so, when does he intend to release it?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Fisheries and Aquaculture.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. GRANTER:

Mr. Speaker, we all know the history of the Province and how important the

cod industry was in the past.

The cod industry, as we debated in this House last week, is extremely

important to the economy today.

It is not as important as it was in the past, but extremely important as we

move back into the groundfish sector.

In answer to the question from the hon. member, I will

get the answer to that and I will report back to him.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

Serious concerns have been raised by Municipalities NL,

the Mayor of Corner Brook, and the mayors and councils of many towns across

rural Newfoundland about the negative impact removing seven electoral seats

from the Island of Newfoundland outside the Northeast Avalon will have at a

time when residents are facing an economic and social tsunami.

I wish I could ask the Opposition Leader as well, but House rules do

not permit that.

So I ask the Premier: Will he pull back from putting

into law the recommendations of the Electoral Boundaries Commission?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Sorry, I did not hear you recognize me.

Mr. Speaker, we have gone through a process in the last

several months, since January, and brought a bill to the House of Assembly

here. There were amendments to

the bill. It was debated here in

the House. It was passed in the

House. Members opposite,

including the Member for the Third Party, were in support of reducing the

number of seats in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

We have gone through a process in bringing a bill forward and passing

legislation in the House, as we do with every other piece of legislation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quid Vidi.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

The Premier certainly has a wonderful imagination.

I ask him: Why did you and the Liberal Party conspire

in the middle of the night of January 22 to cut democratic representation

for rural Newfoundland at a time when its residents are facing such serious

socioeconomic troubles?

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Premier.

PREMIER DAVIS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I am not sure what the member opposite is referring to.

If she is referring to my comment about her public comments that

there should be a reduction in the House of Assembly, I could gladly remind

her well, I can remind you because it was in March 2013 when CBC reported

that the member opposite had said the number of seats can be eliminated

without hurting democracy.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

PREMIER DAVIS:

She said she looks at places like Nova Scotia, Ontario, and other provinces,

that MLAs have much more people in their ridings than we have here in

Newfoundland and Labrador, in districts of Newfoundland and Labrador.

The member opposite has spoken publicly before about reducing the

number of seats in the House of Assembly, Mr. Speaker, as has the Leader of

the Opposition.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

PREMIER DAVIS:

The difference in her and I, is I took action to correct it, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

The difference was they put a number on it when they

did not have the right to do it.

Mr. Speaker, today finds word that an environmental

disaster involving abandoned, orphan wells in the Shoal Point area of the

Province is underway.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. MURPHY:

Still we have government doing nothing about it.

The capped wells are leaching oil and other chemicals into the ocean

environment.

Mr. Speaker, I ask the government: What is the

department doing to address the situation?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Again, Mr. Speaker, further to the answer that I gave earlier, we need to

find out exactly what is going on there.

So we are on the site, we are looking at what is happening.

If there is a cleanup required, we will clean it up.

It does not look like a widespread environmental problem, but we need

to determine exactly what is going on, what needs to be done, where it is

coming from, and, Mr. Speaker, we will take action then.

We are still in the preliminary stages of finding out what is going

on, and when we do, we will take action.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

How much time has to pass before government acts on

this, I wonder? How much is this

clean up going to cost the taxpayer?

Because that is who it is going to come back to is the taxpayers'

pocket. Who is going to be

liable for a spill where there is no ownership that exists right now?

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. CRUMMELL:

Mr. Speaker, we are very proactive with regard to this problem.

We jumped on it right away.

Before anybody even reported to us, Mr. Speaker, we had people in the

field looking at the problem, trying to find out exactly what is going on.

We are gathering information, like I say.

We do not know the extent of the problem or where it is coming from.

There have been natural-occurring seepages in that area

for over 100 years and probably since the beginning of the ice age, Mr.

Speaker. So we need to find out

what is going on. We do know

there has been exploration going on there over the years.

Where is it coming from?

We will determine that, and we will make decisions then based on that

information.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Member for St. John's East has time for a

very quick question.

MR. MURPHY:

Mr. Speaker, it is obvious that this government does not have an answer.

So I will ask the minister again: How much is the

taxpayer going to be liable for in the cleanup of this mess on the West

Coast?

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. the Minister of Environment and Conservation

for a very quick answer.

MR. CRUMMELL:

Yes, Mr. Speaker.

It is way too early to even have that conversation.

We do not even know the scope of the problem.

It does not look that extensive right now, but we need to find out

what is indeed happening.

Mr. Speaker, we have taken responsibility getting out

there and finding out exactly what the problem is.

So we are taking a lead on this.

We will get the answers to the questions when the time is right.

Mr. Speaker, we will report back to the House and certainly to the

people in the region who are most concerned about this issue.

Thank you. Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The time for Question Period has expired.

MS MICHAEL:

A point of order, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Signal Hill Quidi Vidi, on a point of order.

MS MICHAEL:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

During Question Period the Premier was talking about

the debate on Bill 42 and said clearly that all parties in this House had

supported that bill.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MS MICHAEL:

The record will show that our party did not support Bill 42.

We voted against it.

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

There is no point of order.

Presenting Reports by Standing and Select Committees.

Tabling of Documents.

Notices of Motion.

Notices of Motion

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The House Of Assembly Act, Bill 13.

As well, Mr. Speaker

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

I ask members for their co-operation.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will ask leave to introduce a bill

entitled,

An Act To Amend The Health And Community Services Act, Bill 11.

Also, Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Legal Aid Act, Bill 9.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Minister of Finance and President of

Treasury Board.

MR. WISEMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will move that the House resolve

itself into a Committee of the Whole to consider a resolution relating to

the raising of loans by the Province, Bill 10.

Mr. Speaker, I also give notice that I will ask leave

to introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Income Tax Act No. 2, Bill

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Minister of Municipal and

Intergovernmental Affairs.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I give notice that I will ask leave to

introduce a bill entitled,

An Act To Amend The Regional Service Boards Act,

2012, Bill 14.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further notices of motion?

The hon. the Member for Labrador West.

MR. MCGRATH:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that I will move the following private

member's resolution, seconded by the Member for Port au Port:

BE IT RESOLVED that this hon. House supports the

government's decision to invest in the Province's thriving tourism industry

through initiatives that include providing for a $2 million increase in the

tourism marketing budget, bringing the total budget for tourism marketing to

$13 million.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I give notice that the private member's motion just

introduced will be the one that we will debate this coming Wednesday,

Private Members' Day.

As well, Mr. Speaker, I would like to ask leave of the

House I missed a step in the proceedings where I would like to table the

Electoral Boundaries Commission report, with leave of the House.

AN HON. MEMBER:

Leave.

MR. SPEAKER:

Leave.

Tabling of Documents

MR. KING:

Okay. I so table that document

now.

Thank you.

MR. SPEAKER:

Thank you.

Further notices of motion?

Answers to Questions for which Notice has been Given.

Petitions.

Petitions

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Trinity Bay de Verde.

MR. CROCKER:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

To the hon. House of Assembly of the Province of

Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the petition of the

undersigned residents humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS motorists travelling Routes 70, 74, and 80 in

the District of Trinity Bay de Verde have difficulty seeing line markings

at night; and

WHEREAS motorists travelling on Route 70, 74, and 80

fear for their safety; and

WHEREAS government has failed to address this problem;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to ensure line painting is complete on Route 70,

74, and 80 in the District of Trinity Bay de Verde without further delay.

As in duty bound, your petitioners will ever pray.

Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to stand this afternoon

and enter that petition on behalf of the constituents of the District of

Trinity Bay de Verde. This

issue arisen two or three weeks ago when the plants started day and night

shifts in Old Perlican and Bay de Verde, and Winterton in some cases.

What is happening as we have seen outside yesterday

and earlier today is fog is a major issue.

When you go to the tip of the Bay de Verde Peninsula, it is a common

occurrence. Coming off shift in

the early mornings and the late evenings, it is very hard to distinguish the

lines because the line markings are just totally gone from the winter

season.

Mr. Speaker, my office has been in contact with the

department and we urge the department to have the line paintings done,

specifically in these areas, without further delay.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

MR. SPEAKER:

Further petitions?

The hon. the Member for St. George's Stephenville

East.

MR. REID:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I have a petition again today related to health care in

the St. George's and surrounding area.

The petition reads: To the hon. House of Assembly of

the Province of Newfoundland and Labrador in Parliament assembled, the

petition of the undersigned humbly sheweth:

WHEREAS there is not a permanent doctor in the Town of

St. George's; and

WHEREAS this absence of a permanent doctor is seriously

compromising the health care of people who live in the town and surrounding

area causing them undue hardship; and

WHEREAS the absence of a doctor or nurse practitioner

in the area leaves seniors and others without a consistency and quality of

care, which is necessary for their continued good health;

WHEREUPON the undersigned, your petitioners, humbly

pray and call upon the House of Assembly to urge the Government of

Newfoundland and Labrador to take action which will result in a permanent

doctor or other arrangements to improve the health care services in St.

George's and surrounding area.

Mr. Speaker, as members of this House know, I presented

this petition a number of times.

I am going to continue to present this petition until something is done to

solve this problem. The people

in St. George's have been without a permanent doctor in their community for

about half a year now. The

neighbouring clinic in Jeffrey's has not had a doctor in about a

year-and-a-half now. So it is a

serious situation, caused the people of those communities a lot of problems,

a lot of grief, and a lot of problems with their health.

Also, it causes problems in Stephenville.

Because these people do not have a doctor in their community, they

end up going to the emergency room in Stephenville.

That has caused a lot of problems in that facility, as well as people

have had to wait long times to see a doctor there in the clinic.

People have told me that they have had to wait all day to see a

doctor.

So it is a serious matter when people cannot get the

basic medical care that they need.

They cannot get prescriptions filled, they cannot get medication they

need or treatment they need for minor illnesses, which sometimes become

worse because they do not get immediate treatment.

So it is a serious problem.

I would say it is a crisis situation for the people in St. George's

and Stephenville. Concerns are

also being raised about the overall level of service that people are getting

in the Bay St. George area.

So I just want to raise those concerns on behalf of

those people, and I am going to continue to raise them until something is

done to address this situation.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Orders of the Day.

Orders of the Day

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Government House Leader.

MR. KING:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

I would like to now call from the Order Paper, Motion

1, that this House approves in general the Budgetary policy of the

government, the Budget Speech.

MR. SPEAKER:

Resuming debate on the Budget Speech.

I recognize the hon. the Member for St. John's East.

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

This is my first opportunity to speak to the Budget.

I know it was some time ago, and I want to thank all the members for

their concern and everything.

When you have a bit of a health concern, it kind of distracts you away from

the topic at hand. So this is

going to be my I think it is probably my first or second time to actually

talk to the Budget.

Again, an awful lot of time, it seems like, has passed

by since the Budget was presented.

I think earlier in the House we heard that it was somewhere in the

order of thirty-nine days. So,

Mr. Speaker, I guess I will be on my feet this time around talking on behalf

of some of the issues in St. John's East and what my constituents have been

telling me over the last couple of days, and in particular what I have been

hearing around the district.

So that would be number one, and number two, my own

views as to the reasons how come I cannot support this Budget because I

think that this Budget is really quite disturbing and it has taken us on a

completely different path than what we were several years ago in this

Province, Mr. Speaker. The

simple fact is the numbers tell it for themselves, where we have gone and

where we have been and probably where we are going to be going over the next

five years.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to quantify my remarks basically

by starting off talking about 911, because the 911 system in this Province

that everybody have requested is simply not the system that we are going to

be getting. I have asked the

minister this on several occasions and he says that because it is a

budgetary requirement, we are not going to exactly know how this money is

going to be spent in the future nor should we be really concerned about it,

knowing that we have a constant ask on this side of the House.

Mr. Speaker, there is a reason why we have a constant

ask on this side of the House is because everybody deserves fair treatment

when it comes to the 911 system in this Province.

We find, of course, in this Budget that there is no initiative on the

part of government to lead on this particular issue.

I also found that in my conversations with people out

there that it is completely different when you pick up the phone in St.

John's and call 911 looking for assistance and if you happen to be out in

Gander or some other rural municipality out there when you call for help.

There is a difference between a call taker, Mr. Speaker, and a

dispatcher. In St. John's, you

will a true dispatching system.

In St. John's, you will get somebody who will follow up that phone call and

still check back with you and see if you are in trouble.

If you are in the rural part of the Province, you do not get that.

Sometimes you may get the call back afterwards just as a bit of a

follow-up, but other than that you do not get it.

Mr. Speaker, it is our belief on this side of the House

that because the people of the Province are going to be paying for this

system, it is not going to be run out of any government money at all.

It is going to be paid out of seventy five cents per phone call.

The same people who are paying that seventy-five cents should have

the rights to deserve exactly what kind of system that they are going to be

getting in the end.

Mr. Speaker, why not give consumers what they deserve

when it comes to this? I believe

that government while they will be fronting an initiative like this, we know

that the money is going to be forthcoming from consumers to help pay for

this system. So it should be the

consumers that should have the final say, and right now we do not see that

final say, for example, when it comes to the representation that is even on

the board. Several questions

still arise from it.

When we got down through the Budget documents, in

particular through Estimates, I also was shocked to learn that funding for

something near and dear, I guess, was going to be pulled.

I am talking about the Culture and Heritage Estimates and I am

talking about the money that government had set aside for the placing of the

Caribou Memorial at Gallipoli.

We know that anniversary is sadly coming upon us very soon.

I figured that government would have done the right thing in this

particular case, and they would have left the money in there in perpetuity

if it had to be, to help pay for the Caribou Memorial.

I would certainly hope that government would still be fronting an

effort, giving it 110 per cent to make sure that this Caribou Memorial is

going to be erected down at the Gallipoli site knowing that we lost thirty

or forty of our boys down there, men at the time, the cream of our youth in

helping to build this Province.

We lost a generation of Newfoundlanders and

Labradorians down there who were down there to do good.

Unfortunately, we do not have a proper memorial down there.

Right now the government of Turkey says that there is going to be a

system of plaques set up, Mr. Speaker.

I would hope that for the other sites that we have around this world

where the caribou is displayed, that one of these days the caribou symbol

will be there to be displayed again.

So I encourage government to pursue that, but I certainly had wished

that government had left the funding in place for this caribou to happen one

day in the future rather than to have it lost.

Mr. Speaker, over the last couple of weeks of course I

have talked to an awful lot of people as well when it comes to health care.

It is here I think that government is going to be having an issue.

Of course, well whenever you are sick or whenever one of our viewers

may find themselves sick you get the opportunity, in some cases, to get out

there and talk to their health care provider.

In my case, I have had several conversations with my

doctor over the last little while.

One of the things that he tells me right off the bat is that there is

not enough money right now in the system.

He is a doctor who is operating out of a medical clinic with about

31,000 clientele. For the number

of doctors who are there, they tell me that the more doctors they even add,

the more clientele they are going to have, and there are not enough doctors

at any one time to particularly handle the caseload that they have now.

He tells me right now that one of the most important

issues that they are dealing with that they keep asking themselves over the

last ten, twelve years or so that he has been in the medical system is the

amount of representation, for example, that you would get from the

provincial government in its argument, and it should be carrying forth the

argument to the federal government.

Over the last couple of years and I am pretty sure that our viewers

would certainly know this there has been in the order of $36 billion in

cuts that the federal government made to our health care system.

Right now we are the ones who are paying for it.

We pay for it in longer lines, longer wait times, less time to see a

doctor and, in some cases, a rushed health prognosis.

Mr. Speaker, I wanted to bring that forward to

encourage government, to demand of government that they bring forth our

argument as a Province, that there is a need for more funding for our health

care system and to make sure that these arguments are carried forth on their

behalf because, of course, I hear it every other day.

One of the things that I will note in the Budget

talking about health and it only takes you to get sick before you actually

notice it. Mr. Speaker, I guess

in some ways there is some guilt on the fact there that I am a smoker over

the last three weeks since I took sick.

Of course, there is plenty of opportunity to quit so basically over

the last little while we have managed to keep that pack of nails away from

us, and I am feeling a little bit better for it in spite of sounding a

little bit better for it.

Mr. Speaker, one of the things that I have note comes

from the Budget document itself, that this government collected $157 million

in tobacco tax last year. They

are also projecting this year to collect $157 million in tobacco tax as

well. I had somebody ask me

about that and I told them I really do not have an answer for you, but the

obvious sense to me is that there has been no lessening of the amount of

smokers that are out there. It

is obviously a better case for government to get at the arguments against

smoking and take some of that money and put back into the initiatives

against smoking too at the same time.

It was an interesting number, Mr. Speaker, when I saw

it; $157 million in tobacco tax collected last year against $157

million-plus that is projected to be collected for this year.

The question has to be asked about the strategies to help quit.

Again, there is no change in the number from last year when it comes

to that.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It does get a little bit loud in here.

Mr. Speaker, when it comes to health I also have to ask

One of the things that was most alarming that we found in the Budget

was in Transportation Estimates, and of course I hear this from my

constituents from time to time, it is about the future tax load that the

government is taking on.

One of the things that we found in Transportation and

Works Estimates was the simple fact that this government took our membership

in the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships.

There is an interesting name that we found out I think it was in

this particular department that it was something in the order of $35,000 to

$40,000 that they paid out in their membership here through Transportation

and Works.

Mr. Speaker, we all know, we have read so many of the

reports now when it comes to the various Auditors General reports out there

that talk about P3's, the true cost of what happens when government invests

in public-private partnerships.

In the end run, any of the Auditors General in this country that have done

reports on this, they would all tell you that it costs the taxpayer more in

the long run than what it does in the short term.

What are we telling the people of the Province of

money, for example, into long-term care?

What are we telling them?

Well, the Government of Newfoundland and Labrador, through this Budget, is

telling you right now that it does not look like it is going to cost you

very much money upfront; however, the payoff for the infrastructure and the

services that you are going to be getting in the long-term care home in the

future, it is going to cost you.

It is going to cost you a lot more than what government can actually provide

for right now.

Government really needs to think about the amount of

debt load that it is taking on, Mr. Speaker.

In this particular case, they are taking on a debt load for a

generation. We have an older

population in this Province. We

have an aging population in this Province, but we have a government who

ignored the situation for so long now that age of the population has finally

caught up with the expenditures that the government had in the first place;

and now government, seeing that it has a problem that it does right now, has

no other choice but to spend the money upfront, find some way to get it done

and to cost the generation in the future.

Mr. Speaker, I do not think it is acceptable for this

government to be coming out and saying just like the Harper Government did

that it is okay for your grandchild to be looking after it when their

generation comes along because that is essentially what we are saying with

P3's, and that is unacceptable.

That is another reason why I will not be supporting it.

Mr. Speaker, in itself, it was troublesome to find out

that the Department of Transportation and Works had paid for membership in

the Canadian Council for Public-Private Partnerships too because at the same

time it begs the question exactly where the Department of Transportation and

Works is going to be in the next little while.

Are we going to end up having toll roads in this Province I will

ask the minister. Perhaps he can

answer that question in the House: Are we going to end up having toll roads?

Are we going to end up seeing services for the Department of

Transportation and Works privatized in the long run as well because they

took out the membership in this Canadian Council for Public-Private

Partnerships?

Again, this is going to cost us, as taxpayers, more

than what government is actually letting on because right, up front, it

sounds like it is such a little cost, but later on it is going to cost the

generations dearly.

Mr. Speaker, in my door to door adventures over the

last couple of weeks since the Budget like I said, it seems so long ago

now, thirty-nine or forty days ago.

One of the things I did hear about is anger, of course, over the HST

off heat and light. It is one of

these initiatives that consumers of Newfoundland and Labrador had signed on

too many years ago, presented a petition in this House to have the tax on

heat and light removed. What did

this government do? They removed

the taxation several years ago in one of the budgets, and only this year

decided to reinstitute the tax on heat.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. MURPHY:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is getting a little bit loud in here.

I do not know if the members across the way like my remarks or not,

but either way it is my chance to speak to it, so I will.

Mr. Speaker, there is plenty of anger and angst over

the re-addition, if you will, of the tax on heat.

The people of Newfoundland and Labrador thought they had signed a

contract with this government when it came to the removal of the tax on

heat. Mr. Speaker, this is

disposable income that was going directly back into everybody's pockets.

It was going back directly into the economy again, because we all

know this money was being re-spent again.

Everybody knows the money was out there actually generating jobs.

Mr. Speaker, if you were an oil heat user or if you

were an electricity user, either way, it was only measured by your

consumption of how much money you were going to be getting back.

It begs the question about the

agreements, if you will, that we have with our Province, with the people who

govern us too, what right have we in the form of taxation that we are

getting right now.

It is my belief that the government should reverse its

decision on this reprehensible tax.

They should go back to the way it used to be with no tax on heat or

light, on a basic necessity of life.

Mr. Speaker, it is the same as taxing food, in my eyes.

Mr. Speaker, the question still revolves around fair

taxation levels versus road and bridgework, for example.

Another thing I certainly heard about was the amount of money that

was actually going into roads. A

lot of people I talk to certainly know the state of our highways, they

certainly know the state of the bridgework.

We heard government last week put a little bit of money

back into, for example, the putting down of asphalt on some of the

bridgework. We know government

has ignored this problem too long.

The Auditor General has already stated he put the number, I think,

at close to $900 million in his report last year talking about the state of

roads and bridges. The people of

Newfoundland and Labrador, now getting ready to enjoy the summer holiday

travel season, will certainly get to know intimately our roads, our

highways, and our bridges as regards to the state of the asphalt.

We certainly know the $66 million back into roads that

we are going to be seeing this year does not match, in no uncertain terms,

Mr. Speaker, the almost $3 billion in money, in gas taxes, for example, that

have been collected in various Budgets since, probably about 1997.

You can put pretty much close to $3 billion on that, but again only

$66 million back into roads.

Mr. Speaker, we thought this year we would also see a

plan for roads. We thought we

would hear about that in the Budget.

We were really let down about that.

One of the things this party pressed for was a plan for roads.

The Auditor General commented on the simple fact that

there were no plans for roads. He

could not find any evidence of a plan for roads.

Hence, we ended up about $900 million in the hole when it came to

road and bridgework maintenance that still has not been carried out.

Government now has to find a way of catching up on that particular

amount as well. We paid for it

already. We gave the money to

government upfront. Government

did not invest it back into it.

Mr. Speaker, I want to talk a little bit about

environment and conservation as well in the short time that I have left.

I keep saying this line, and I keep saying it as a reminder to

government. Today, of course, we

get another reminder when it comes to environment and conservation.

Never in our history has the environment of our Province been under

so much pressure as what it is right now.

As evidence to that, one of the reasons why we, on this

side of the House, asked for a moratorium on fracking, number one, and asked

for the panel to start taking submissions, was a case that we are seeing

today. One of the inherent

things we found wrong with fracking, not only does it damage water supplies,

but people tend to walk away from the mess they leave us.

Mr. Speaker, today is evidence of that fact.

I think everybody in this House should be absolutely shocked and

absolutely abhorred with the simple fact of the pictures we saw this week.

What we had was capped wells from many years ago that

were abandoned, orphaned, as they are known in the industry, that are now

leaking. What had happened to

those wells what I am told happened to those wells is simple, the land

eroded to the point where these wells ended up out in the water.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, with no protection around them they corroded.

It is going to make no difference whether they are on land or on the

ocean, they still would have corroded in the first place.

What we have here now is an unmitigated disaster off

our coast over on the beautiful Port au Port Peninsula.

The oil is still flows and government still has not acted on it.

They came out the other day with legislation, Bill 2, that we can

comment a little bit more on later on when that piece of legislation comes

up again in Committee, but it begs a lot of people to ask, when it comes to

fracking, why should we say yes to it if we are going to be left with a

future disaster like this fifty years down the road?

Because that is what this disaster left us.

What we need to see from this government, Mr. Speaker,

in this Budget, it certainly would have entitled government to seek more

protection for water resources.

We would have loved to see source water protection legislation or at least

money put aside for that. We

would have liked to see government put more money into the protection of

caribou herds. We have the red

wine herd in trouble.

We would have loved to have seen more enforcement and

monitoring. We know government

is starting to take steps here but it is still not enough.

We would certainly like to see government put more money into

environmental liabilities and included as part of debt.

We know we have an awful long future for us to worry about when it

comes to fracking, mine waste, holding ponds, and closed mills.

Mr. Speaker, I see my time is up.

Again, I cannot support this Budget based on this, certainly not with

the financial mess that we are left right now.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

The hon. Deputy House Leader

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

Mr. Speaker, I would like to call from the Order Paper,

Motion 7, to move pursuant to Standing Order 11 that the House not adjourn

at 5:30 p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2015.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that the House not adjourn at 5:30 p.m. today.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The motion is carried.

The hon. Deputy House Leader.

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Mr. Speaker, as well, I call Motion 8, to move pursuant to Standing Order 11

that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. on Monday, June 8, 2015.

MR. SPEAKER:

The motion is that the House not adjourn at 10:00 p.m. tonight.

All those in favour, 'aye.'

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Aye.

MR. SPEAKER:

All those against, 'nay.'

The motion is carried.

The hon. Deputy House Leader, we will resume with

debate on the Budget?

MR. HUTCHINGS:

Yes.

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for St. Barbe.

MR. J. BENNETT:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

When I first began to speak to Budget 2015, Mr.

Speaker, I was going through a list of items of discretionary spending

department by department where this Budget actually increased the spending

from last year. The bottom line

of this discretionary spending, which means the minister is calling the

shots in each particular department on what they will spend money on, the

top levels at or near the minister's office, and there were 106 items.

This is a Budget; it is the largest Budget in our

history, over $8 billion. It is

the largest deficit in our history, over $1 billion, and it seeks to

increase the HST to be the highest in Canada, at not just 15 per cent, but

because of the way we compound tax on tax in this Province, we will end up

with the highest harmonized sales tax of all of Canada as a result of this

Budget. So when government talks

about the tough times there is, I thought it would be useful to go through

the Budget to just see what they are doing to restrain themselves.

None of these increases are absolutely necessary if the ministers

would simply hold the line on these discretionary expenses.

The total of 106 of these expenses comes to more than $30 million a

year.

We are seeing the boundary debate being rushed through.

We are seeing boundaries being changed and the Premier said this is

so we can save the Premier said $10 million, but I understand that was

when he was talking about getting rid of ten seats.

Getting rid of eight seats, the amount of money that we are going to

save would be even less, yet on this increase in discretionary spending

and I will go through this momentarily this government preaches one thing

and then practices another. It

preaches restraint and then it practises waste.

It preaches personal responsibility and then it takes no

responsibility for everything that has happened to us.

It did not happen to us.

It was caused to us by the management or, more accurately put, the

mismanagement of this government.

To take up where I left off since I only have a

couple of pages of these left, that will leave enough time so I can review

the building maintenance or the lack of maintenance of the public buildings

in this Province, which is even more timely today with the CBC report, which

talks about the tens of millions of dollars that we are spending on rent,

primarily in the Avalon Region.

Rent on real estate that maybe if we were maintaining our own buildings more

properly, we would not need to rent this real estate.

We would not have vacant building owned by the taxpayers in this

Province littered all over the place, as the Auditor General pointed out in

2011, four years ago.

Mr. Speaker, in the Minister's Office in Early

Childhood Education, page 16.3.

The minister who I understand is going to follow me, so this will give him

a launching point. In the

Minister's Office, the budget was $272,000 last year.

It is going to go up to $322,000.

So the minister has decided that he needs an extra $50,000 on

$270,000 to run that is a 20 per cent increase in that particular line

item.

In Executive Support, the minister has decided that he

needs to go up from $870,000 to $939,000.

So that is $69,000. In

Corporate Services, the minister has decided that he needs to go up from

$1,393,000 to $1,448,000. That

is an extra $55,000.

In policy why on earth would this government, a dying

government in the last year and in the last six months of its mandate, need

to spend an extra $43,000 on policy for early childhood education?

It is not that they are not spending enough already the budget for

policy alone is $364,700, and that is going to be ballooned up to a bloated

$407,500. That is in that

department, Mr. Speaker.

When we get to Health and Community Services and

health care is critically important.

Health care consumes nearly forty cents of every dollar that we spend

in this Province, and health care is very important to people, but on the

top end this is not front-line workers, this is not providing medication,

this is not providing additional doctors or nurses or support staff.

This is on the top line in administrative and corporate spending.

So, Health and Community Services on administrative salaries we are

going to from $1,667,000 to $1,731,000.

So that is another $60,000 to $70,000.

Corporate Services is going to go from $4.8 million to

$5.03 million; that is an extra 5 per cent in Corporate Services.

In regional administration, from $1,238,000 to $1.8 million; that is

$600,000 more discretionary spending that we have, even though we have

consolidated health boards, so we are supposed to realize savings.

Mr. Speaker, in Population Health we are going to, on

the top end, we are going to spend from an increase of $1.38 million to

$1.53 million. So that is an

extra $150,000. If we look at

the government's results in the health of our population over the last

twelve years it is absolutely deplorable, and the only time that we really

seem to get worked up about is when a travel writer writes about people in

St. Anthony and the Jungle Jim's being overweight, so that gets everybody

absolutely worked up into a lather, and meanwhile what we should be doing,

we should be paying more attention to population health over the last twelve

years.

You do not get an instant result when you improve

population health through exercise, weight control, smoking, drinking it

takes a few years but it does not take twelve years.

Certainly after three or four, five or six or seven years there

should be some benefit. We are

seeing no benefit in the overall health of our population from all of the

spending that this government has been doing.

That is because it has been misplaced spending.

It has been administrative spending.

It is not focused on an area to get us the best results.

Mr. Speaker, in Justice, we know that crime is

literally out of control, particularly in St. John's.

We saw waves of impaired drivers just this past weekend, two here,

and three there, and one someplace else on a fairly small population.

Yet we see Justice spending more on Executive Support.

We see more for lawsuits legal fees for lawsuits going from $4.8

million to $5.1 million, an extra $300,000 budgeted for lawsuits this year

for this government to presumably defend itself.

We see an increase in the expenses for fish and wildlife, $3.6

million going up to $4 million.

That is $400,000.

Mr. Speaker, it was only a handful of years ago that

this government decided to take on certain federal responsibilities.

The federal government is responsible for fisheries, for the salmon,

for the trout, and for our waterways.

So it is not good enough that we would take over fisheries research

which we do not do anything with in any event because we say the feds are

not doing a good enough job we have to take over fisheries enforcement

when really that is a federal responsibility.

The feds ought to have been made accountable and held accountable for

us.

Why should we be taking our valuable hard-earned

taxpayers' dollars to pay for something that Ottawa should be paying for in

the first place? We do not hear

a squeak from this government to force Ottawa to live up to their

constitutional obligations to us as a Province, Mr. Speaker.

We also see an increase in spending and this is at

the top level, not for any front-line workers, not for any benefits to

anybody. Executive Support for

Labour Relations is gone up $50,000.

Administrative salaries have gone up another $25,000.

Then we get to Municipal and Intergovernmental Affairs,

a strategic plan going from $934,000 to $1.2 million.

That is around a quarter of a million dollars.

Local Governance has gone up from $371,000 to $523,000; policy from

$560,000 to $634,000; infrastructure and waste from $452,000 to $516,000.

Mr. Speaker, it goes on and on and on.

It is almost like a tsunami of spending with this government.

It seems like they cannot find an idea that they cannot spend money

on anything that happens, anything that is available.

Mr. Speaker, these numbers over a period of time this

is not to say that government does not waste money in huge gobs, $10 million

or $12 million on the Roddickton pellet plant, like huge mistakes.

This is the incremental waste, the erosion of the dollars of the

taxpayers. So this comes out to

more than $30 million a year of additional discretionary spending.

It did not create a single job.

It did not save a single dollar.

It did not improve people's health.

It did not improve the status of education in our Province.

It did not improve tourism in our Province.

These are top-line dollars, $30 million a year on a

bloated $8 billion Budget. It is

really tragic that we have cut through more than $20 billion in oil

royalties, mineral royalties. We

have seen the best of times and now we are facing the worst of times,

because we were wasteful. This

government was wasteful during a time when we had money.

If all of the money had gone into infrastructure as this government

says it has, which clearly it has not, then we would not have the situation

we find with our public buildings.

Mr. Speaker, the very first Auditor General's report I

reviewed was the one from 2011, not long after being elected.

One of the areas that really attracted my attention was the public

buildings owned by the people of this Province and how they are not being

maintained by this government.

The Auditor General said in his 2011 report that the people of the Province

own 854 buildings in 385 sites.

So most places have one building, some have two, some have three, and the

replacement cost of those buildings was $1,940,000,000.

Roughly, the same amount of money as this government put into the

pension plan they got from Ottawa.

Then the stock market crashed, and we lost a third of it overnight.

Of the 854 buildings, the Auditor General he did a

review since this government came to power.

The Auditor General looked at the 2000 report.

This government came to power in 2003.

So the Auditor General did a report in 2004.

This was the report in 2011, which is seven years later.

It is like a comparison, a before and after, and say: What did we

recommend in 2004? I believe it

was Mr. Noseworthy who was the Auditor General in 2004.

The AG said in 2004 that, Government owned buildings

are in need of significant repairs.

He also said department officials have expressed concern about the

lack of funding provided to maintain Government's buildings.

This was in 2004 when we had no money.

They also said, the required maintenance and capital

alterations and improvements were not being performed and government

buildings were deteriorating 2004.

Also, the Auditor General found the government's database of

buildings is not complete .

The database was not complete, so we did not know what we had and where we

had it. This is being managed by

Transportation and Works. So

Transportation and Works is in charge of these buildings, of looking after

them.

At that point the Auditor General said, The Department

does not use a risk based system to identify and prioritize its maintenance

work. So, Mr. Speaker, that

could mean you are going to mow the lawn instead of fixing the roof.

It is kind of nice to mow the lawn but if the roof is leaking, why

wouldn't you fix the roof first?

If the windows are gone, then fix the windows that are gone, do not paint

the fence. You need to

prioritize your maintenance program.

Mr. Speaker, the ordinary homeowner can easily

understand this. You have

repairs that need to be done to your home, you have a certain amount of

money. Where am I going to spend

it? I am going to spend it in

the most important areas where it is going to get me the best result.

You need to know what is more important.

This government did not know in 2004, what were the most important

areas to fix up and what were the least important.

The AG also said, the Department of Transportation and

Works does not have the information necessary for a comprehensive plan to

address the nature, amount and timing of future capital expenditures.

They did not know what was going on in 2004.

They also said, The Department does not have a plan to

devolve Government of its vacant buildings.

That means we do not know how to get rid of the ones we are not using

anymore because we do not know where they are, we do not know what they are

worth, and we do not know what they are costing.

That was the background to the 2011 report as reported

in 2004. Seven years later, what

do we have? Seven years later

the AG said the department had taken some action on the concerns raised in

2004. One of the more troubling

areas was that in 2011 the Auditor General said there are twenty-five vacant

buildings that require maintenance service, vacant.

Eight of them require a utility resource despite being unoccupied.

The building is vacant and the lights are on.

Wouldn't an ordinary consumer, if you are going to move

away from your home, even for the winter for your summer home, you are

likely going to drain it all down.

You are probably going to get some windshield wash or anti-freeze and

put it in the toilet bowls. You

are going to shut off the water.

You may not turn off the electricity completely but for sure you will stop

spending money when you are not using it.

Why doesn't ordinary common sense in maintaining buildings apply to

this government? I do not know.

I do not know if anybody knows why.

AN HON. MEMBER:

(Inaudible).

MR. J. BENNETT:

It does not apply.

One thing which is really staggering in the amount of

repairs and maintenance that was required in the 2004 Auditor General's

report, the AG said the deferred maintenance, what you need to do to fix up

the buildings, comes to $261 million.

You have $2 billion worth of buildings, you need $261 million in 2004

to fix them up. So you would

think with all the money we ran through in the next seven years, we would

have the buildings all fixed up.

Not true!

In 2011, there is over twice as much remaining to be

done. It is going to cost half a

billion dollars. That is $549

million now to fix up the buildings, when it was only $261 million seven

years earlier. Not only did they

not maintain the buildings, they did not fix them up.

They let it continue to run down.

In the 2011 report, Mr. Speaker, the Auditor General

was even more precise. The AG

said in 2011, over the next five years there are $306 million of maintenance

you need to do on these buildings.

You need to do $306 million in the next five years.

One would think you would take maybe the $306 million, probably

divide it by five, and that would be like $60 million a year.

So you would average your maintenance over the next five-year period.

What did they budget instead?

In 2012-2013 they budgeted $43 million, in 2013-2014 they budgeted

$43 million, and in 2014-2015 they budgeted $44 million.

That is not to say what they actually did, that is what they

budgeted. This year they have

budgeted $43 million. It is

almost like this department has a fixation to say: well, pick a number,

guess a number. Let's go with

$40 million, $43 million, or $44 million.

Doing the math, Mr. Speaker, this means of all of the

maintenance that was required from four years ago, being $306 million, in

four years, including this year, the government has budgeted only $175

million. So now we have a

shortfall on maintenance.

Surely, everybody understands that if you do not fix up your home if you

do not repair the leaks in the roof, if you do not repair the leaking

waterlines, if you do not maintain the home properly, windows broken you

are going to get more and more deterioration.

This government has not done a very good job of managing the economy

generally and certainly has done a very poor job of managing our public

buildings.

Mr. Speaker, it is almost like there is nobody in

charge. It would be absolutely

encouraging to find a single department where the government had a plan,

where the government had a budget, where somebody was actually in charge,

and when they said at the end of the year this is what we decided to do,

this is what we got done. We

fell a little bit short, it cost a little bit more, but at least you would

know where you wanted to go.

If you do not know where you are which the AG showed

they did not know where they were in 2004.

They did not have a strategic plan.

If you do not know where you are, if you do not know where you are

going to go, and you underfund it in any event, this means that $2 billion

worth of real estate on replacement costs in over 800 buildings is literally

going to waste. There are

twenty-five of them empty, eight with the heat and lights still on.

Then we get a report from the CBC today which says how

much we are leasing. We are

leasing buildings all over the place when we are not maintaining our own.

I understand it is not that glamourous to fix up buildings.

It might not be a photo op for the minister.

I understand that coming in on budget might not be that glamourous.

It is nice to do the photo ops and it is nice to cut the ribbons, but

it is also nice and it is absolutely critical to maintain the people's

money, maintain the people's buildings, and have some sort of a

comprehensive plan which says this is our fleet of buildings.

We have 800 or 900, whatever it is.

Now we know where all of them are.

We have a list. We know

this one needs this much maintenance.

This one needs this much maintenance.

This one needs to be attended to maybe for winterization.

Somebody needs to start running the show.

It seems like we are going from day to day spending money like crazy.

Now we are facing the highest deficit we have ever had, we have the

largest Budget that we ever had, and the oil money is all gone.

That is the situation we are left in.

It is no good for the Premier or the Minister of Finance to say:

Well, everything is going to be just fine.

Well, I do not think so, not going in the direction we

are going. We cannot pray to the

god of oil and hope that everything works out.

We have to start managing our own affairs.

For sure, we can manage the expense side.

If we cannot manage the expense side, we should not ask to be rehired

in November.

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER (Littlejohn):

The hon. the Minister of Seniors, Wellness and Social

Development.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. JACKMAN:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

It is a great honour to speak anytime in this House.

There is no doubt about it.

I have been here twelve years.

I know sometimes people outside look at this place and they see what

is happening in here and sometimes it can be a bit rambunctious or whatnot,

but I have certainly come to appreciate this particular House of Assembly

that we sit in.

It is where the business of the people of the Province

is done. It is where laws are

proclaimed. It is where laws are

adjusted. It is where

regulations are changed and all aimed at doing betterment for the people of

the Province. There is no doubt

about that. Whenever I get the

opportunity to stand on my feet here, I appreciate that opportunity and

recognize that when we look at other parts of the world I was to a forum

recently where one of the countries in the session commented they had 400

terrorist attacks on their schools in one year in one year.

The thing that struck me is that these radical groups,

in order to control their masses, one of the first places they hit are

schools because they know that an educated population are the ones who can

turn things around, who will question, who will challenge, and eventually

make change. So it is a sad

situation.

I know when we talk about our own education system in

this House, there will always be challenges.

We heard the question on the Autism Spectrum Disorder today.

There are many other things.

We need to continue to work towards those, but recognizing that where

Canada is and where Newfoundland and Labrador is, we are in a good place

compared to many of the jurisdictions who faced issues just imagine having

one of our children, one of our students sitting in the classroom and all of

a sudden a terrorist attacks and destroys the school, or in the nighttime

destroying the school. We have

to put things in perspective, Mr. Speaker.

I was listening to the Member for St. Barbe and it is

not always that I will get up and revert to the things that we have done in

the past and that kind of stuff but when a member gets up and he raises

certain issues, I think the onus is on me to counter some of the

commentaries that he has made.

He talked on the discretionary spending.

Well, we went through a Budget exercise here just a

while ago and as departments and as ministers, we looked at places where we

could save and here I am going to commend the bureaucrats because under

the headings we have expenditures for Transportation and Communications,

Supplies, Purchased Services, and all these kind of things, and we have to

commend the people that work in our departments because what they did is

they recognized the challenge and they came forward with suggestions and

then let's say they travel a little bit less.

They spent a little bit less on supplies.

They made honest efforts to assist in the situation that we find

ourselves in.

He talked about the boundary changes.

I do not know, maybe I am misinterpreting him, but he seems to be now

questioning whether the boundary changes are the right things or not.

It was referenced today by the Premier that the Leader of the

Opposition is not sure. My take

on his commentary today is that he seems to have changed his mind a little.

I guess the thing is that we can stand here and listen and one thing

about it is you cannot change your mind from day to day.

I do believe he was a member that stood up and voted.

He voted to support it and I am not quite certain but I guess we will

see what tomorrow will bring and what the opinion is, and we will see what

next week and the opinion is, and next month we will see what the opinion

is.

He talked about Population Health and the spending in

the wellness of our population as being money misplaced.

Now I take exception to that statement.

If you look at the phenomenon of people being overweight and the

obesity rates, it is not unique to Newfoundland and Labrador, it is not

unique to Canada, and generally, in North America we see the challenge.

A lot of it comes from the different type of lifestyle that we now

live.

There are people of my age who we have talked about it

from time to time and like I said, I do not want to go there too much, but

when you were kids, dare I say, fifty years ago now, everybody is looking

at me; dare I say fifty years ago it was certainly a different lifestyle.

I can remember mom or dad singing out to you it is time to come in.

Now we are battling with kids, it is time to go out.

They have become very much a sedentary lifestyle.

The iPads, the phones, the TVs.

Just look at anybody's home today.

At one point you were lucky if you had one TV in your house, and

people gathered around to watch it.

I doubt if there are very many homes in this Province now with only

one TV. The amazing thing that I

noticed a little while ago I went into a house where there were three

people, three people lived in this one house I did not make commentary to

the individuals there and I counted seven televisions, seven TVs in a

house where three people lived.

So it tells you the different type of lifestyle that we

are leading. The kids today are

not as active. So what do we do?

It is not misplaced money, Mr. Speaker.

Now, one thing that I will agree with the member on, he mentioned to

change an attitude, to change a lifestyle, is not something that you are

going to snap a program and it happens.

Just look at the anti-smoking campaign.

Look at where they have come in thirty years.

Think about anybody who went on a plane or elsewhere,

you sat up and you smoked. One

of the strangest things I have seen and I tried to pull it out of the

wall, but I could not do it I went into this one particular place where a

piece of furniture is still left.

It was in the bathroom, I will say that.

Right above the toilet paper roll was an ashtray.

Now think about where you would see that today absolutely not.

If you look at the people like Kevin Coady and those

people are doing around smoking, man, we have made major gains major,

major gains now. Even your most

prolific smokers, many of them now you see them pull off on the side of the

road. They do not smoke in their

vehicles. They purchase the

vehicles; they will stop on the side of the road, get out, have their

cigarette, and get back in.

If you think about that and think about the individual

who, twenty years ago, driving down the road and said no, sorry, you cannot

smoke in my car, but I will stop and let you out.

That person would have been seen as a bit unusual.

Today, even the most prolific smokers are people who will step

outside.

If we look at some of the spending that we have put

into recreation, we have the physical activity and the community

investments, the recreation supports that we put $1.5 million a year into.

We have our community capital grants, and all MHAs would practically

recognize them. They range from

$5,000 up to $15,000 that people can avail of.

Oftentimes, the good thing about those grants is that the people and

the groups who come into the communities and put in applications for those

grants often have partners with them so that if they are given $15,000, they

may have raised $20,000 or $30,000, then you might get some corporate

support for them and on from that.

The Seniors Community Recreation Grant, we put $200,000

in programs that support provincial recreation sports strategies around

provincial healthy aging policies and programs.

I will say that I met this morning with the advisory committee on

aging and seniors. Again, we

talked about the challenges that are going to be facing our senior

population not only facing our senior population, Mr. Speaker, facing the

children of those who are aging.

For example, in my family, my mother passed away just a

couple of years ago, but there were ten children, ten of us, and we are

lucky enough that eight of us still live in the Province.

So we could provide for her and keep her in her home as long as we

possibly could by all of us, brothers and sisters taking shifts; but, think

about today, the family sizes are certainly not of eight, ten and twelve

children, so the responsibility that is going to fall on one child or two

children is huge and we are going to have to somehow find another way to

address it.

Even in the provision of home care we are having

difficulties. I know in rural

parts of the Province, in areas of my district we are finding it a challenge

some people are to get health care workers.

Again, we keep supporting seniors to the tune that we can.

One of the programs as well we launched and this

speaks to what I was talking about before Participation Nation Unplugged.

If there is one thing that I have had some commentary about recently

are the ad campaigns that are on TV.

We have a group of kids who are playing or something, and the screen

gets smaller, smaller, and smaller.

It is interesting they put on the ad and the brochure that this is

our website, please do not call us, or please do not contact us.

Stay active, stay outside, and lead a healthier lifestyle.

Mr. Speaker, I am going to speak on one thing as well

that the Member for St. Barbe raised.

He used again and I have heard it said several times from people

across the way, he uses the word wastage, that this government has wasted

money. He talks about our lack

of spending in infrastructure. I

have to take some exception to that because I came from the school system

before I got into politics.

There was an issue around our schools, around maintenance that needed to be

done, extension upgrades that needed to be done, air quality issues, and

construction of new schools.

Mr. Speaker, if I look at health care, ever more

demanding. If you look at the

investments in wait-lists and he also mentioned that we failed in tourism.

I have to again take exception.

If we look at our TV ads for tourism, all we have to do is look at

the number and the increase in the number of people who have travelled to

our Province over the past number of years.

We have to say that our investment in that field has been

unsurpassed.

Secondly, I think at one point that we saw a quaint

type of tourism establishments.

Now what we have, I feel, in the Province are tourism establishments that

are second to none anywhere in the world.

People in rural parts of the Province who own bed and breakfasts take

their quality of service very seriously.

They are offering a service, like I said, second to none.

If I look to my district and speak to some of the

initiatives that have come to my district since I came in 2003, I am telling

you, the people in my district will not say that these projects were wasted

funds. They will not.

One of the first things that we did was to put in place a CT scan.

A CT scan where they would often have to travel maybe to St. John's

most times to get that service.

That was put in place.

Another thing that has happened down there is dialysis.

If there was one piece of equipment or service that I feel that we

need to do as much as we possibly can in the Province that is with that

dialysis unit. Here is an

example, I would have people and many of us who are in from rural parts of

the Province can attest to that.

We would have people who were on dialysis who would travel three times a

week. I would have people who

would leave Burin, would travel to St. John's and back three times a week to

receive dialysis.

Now, to a normal, healthy person travelling to St.

John's and back in a day can be draining.

Just think of someone who as a health problem, a kidney problem, a

dialysis issue, who would travel to St. John's and back three times a week.

Just think of the drain that it does on the body.

When I walk away from this political arena, that is one of the things

that I will proudly say was one of the moments in politics that I was most

proud of is that now we can provide twenty-four people a day up there on

dialysis. It is something that

will be a crowning moment.

Secondly, two things that have been announced in the

Budget around the

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Oh, oh!

MR. SPEAKER:

Order, please!

MR. JACKMAN:

adult protection units, around dementia.

Second, a clinic what people will call in the northern part of our

district. Down in the area where

I live, Mr. Speaker, there is a clinic down there now that provides

services. People have pushed a

doctor service is lacking in a particular area, and I know because in

working on this clinic, moving this clinic forward, I met with

Eastern Health and they are finding it more and more difficult to

recruit doctors. In particular

case, what we had was a doctor who was travelling to clinic A, B, C and

doing some other work.

What they did, in this particular case, the communities

came together and said we will close out our smaller clinics and we will

create one centralized clinic.

They agreed as to where it would be and now a doctor visits there and the

patients go to him.

There are ways that we can make inroads but it means

that we, as politicians, have to bring some things to our constituents and

say now is this a possibility. We

work with Eastern Health, is this a possibility, and in the end we arrive at

a solution.

I heard an interview today that talked about the size

of the public service. It says

that one in every five people in the Province work in the public service.

So we have almost 20 per cent of our population, including children

and adults, who work in the public service.

The other commentary was that per capita, Newfoundland

and Labrador has more public servants than any other jurisdiction in Canada.

Now I am assuming I will not take it at face value, but the

reporter, that is what they said.

There are a couple ways to do it, and I know we have thrown shots

across. Members opposite have

said: We are going to cut, we are just not sure where yet.

The Minister of Finance, and we as a government,

decided here is the way we will tackle the size of the public service.

We want it to be more efficient.

We want more use of technology.

So rather than massive layoffs, how we have decided to do it is

through attrition. Each of our

departments has identified a number through attrition, and as retirements

take place, we will not refill all of those positions.

Making sure core front line services are still in effect so that the

people of the Province get served more equitably.

Now I know the Minister of Transportation and Work, we

have been looking at something down our way for a while, just as an example

of a means of efficiency. We are

looking at a piece of equipment that simply will print out licences;

whereas

before, I think the people down my way would have to travel to Clarenville

or St. John's. If somebody

offers that service in St. John's, we travel to them.

Well, maybe what we can do is identify a piece of technology that

once you pay your fee, that piece of technology will spit that document out.

It is a cost-saving measure, but it is also a way to do it more

efficiently.

Mr. Speaker, it is amazing.

I had four piles.

Everything from Newfoundland and Labrador Housing to more seniors' issues,

the OrgCode report around homelessness, but my twenty minutes is down to

forty-one seconds now.

Mr. Speaker, I will close by saying this, the final

word. The one thing I will say

to the Member for St. Barbe is that the people in my district who have seen

investments will not use the word that it was wasted money.

There was no spending that went on in my district that was not

required. I can tell you that I

am not someone who is going to spend frivolously.

It is something that was needed in the area.

We worked with our constituents to make sure things were done, and,

Mr. Speaker, my last word, it is not wastage.

Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker.

SOME HON. MEMBERS:

Hear, hear!

MR. SPEAKER:

The hon. the Member for Carbonear Harbour Grace.

MR. SLADE:

Thank you, Mr. Speaker, for an opportunity once again to rise in this hon.

House to speak on Budget 2015.

First of all, Mr. Speaker, I stand here very proudly

today to represent the constituents of my District of Carbonear Harbour

Grace, and it is a privilege for me to do so.

I want to touch on a few issues that are taking place

in my district, and if it sounds like I am being repetitive, it is because I

am being repetitive, for the simple fact that things did not get done.

Of course, when you are up here on your feet and you talk about the

Budget, you sit here and you wonder the reason why it did not get done.

So, Mr. Speaker, the first thing I would like to say is

the mayor and councillors in the Town of Victoria, many mayors in the past,

and right up until this point in time, mayors and councillors in Victoria

have worked very hard on behalf of their community to bring it forward.

Of course, as you well know, we all need infrastructure in our

communities.

Mr. Speaker, it is said around circles that the federal

government is the first level of government.

Then it comes down to the Province, which is the second level of

government, and then of course it comes down to municipalities.

I think a little bit different than that.

In my past life as the Mayor of Carbonear, my thought

was the federal government downloads on the provincial government.

The provincial government downloads

on the municipalities. Of

course, the municipalities have no other choice but to download on its

residents. So from my point of

view, the first level of government is municipalities.

Of course, as you know, they are the front line workers because those

ladies and gentlemen are always there and it is very easy for people to

approach and get at them from the front line.

So I just wanted to pass that along to you.

Like I just spoke about Victoria, these folks work very

hard in their communities. They

love to see their communities build.

By the way, Victoria is one of those communities that is growing.

It is coming along very nicely.

Of course, as I just said, all those communities that I am going to

refer to here today all need infrastructure.

As they grow, they will look at government to make sure government is

there onboard with them and all the time looking for infrastructure.

What I found over the years as it pertained to

infrastructure, you applied for the funding and then, of course, usually

early in the spring of the year Municipal Affairs comes out with what is

passed and what is not. Anyway,

that is not done up to this point in time here right now.

It was always a problem for me, as the Mayor of Carbonear, for the

simple fact that you applied for it, it would go before the Department of

Municipal Affairs, then it would come back, and then you had to go out and

get the work done on the project.

By time it went back to the minister's office and sat

on his desk for five or six weeks, all of a sudden, Mr. Spea